09-29-2012, 10:23 PM
(This post was last modified: 09-29-2012, 10:40 PM by FireIceTalon.)
Um, I made the same point to eppie that you quoted in my original point also; see post #19. You just chose not to quote the whole thing to suit your purposes 
For what we know, the States reason has something to do with "state law gives the city some control over where people bury their loved ones and have cited concerns about long-term care, appearance, property values and the complaints of some neighbors".
Mr. Davis clearly stated that long term care and appearance wouldn't be an issue, so it must be something to do with either property values or neighbor complaints or both. There is certainly no health hazard involved in the given circumstances either, since she is buried within a enclosed concrete vault and a metal casket. If there were, that would be a different story and I would hold a different opinion. Long term care and appearance do not effect the interests of the State, but property values and neighbor complaints do, so one has to conclude that this must be their reasoning for denying him. If that is the case, which it seems to be, then it is BOGUS. He had the health dept legitimize it as a residential burial of which the State has no control over, and now it wants to make some noise because it is against THEIR interests in some fashion - but it certainly isn't harming anyone else. As I said before, the State or any authority ALWAYS has the burden of justifying its legitimacy, and here, as it usually does, it falls short. Again, I find the whole thing repulsive and they just need to leave this poor old man alone worry about things that ACTUALLY matter, like paving the fucking roads and bridges and building better schools.
For what we know, the States reason has something to do with "state law gives the city some control over where people bury their loved ones and have cited concerns about long-term care, appearance, property values and the complaints of some neighbors".
Mr. Davis clearly stated that long term care and appearance wouldn't be an issue, so it must be something to do with either property values or neighbor complaints or both. There is certainly no health hazard involved in the given circumstances either, since she is buried within a enclosed concrete vault and a metal casket. If there were, that would be a different story and I would hold a different opinion. Long term care and appearance do not effect the interests of the State, but property values and neighbor complaints do, so one has to conclude that this must be their reasoning for denying him. If that is the case, which it seems to be, then it is BOGUS. He had the health dept legitimize it as a residential burial of which the State has no control over, and now it wants to make some noise because it is against THEIR interests in some fashion - but it certainly isn't harming anyone else. As I said before, the State or any authority ALWAYS has the burden of justifying its legitimacy, and here, as it usually does, it falls short. Again, I find the whole thing repulsive and they just need to leave this poor old man alone worry about things that ACTUALLY matter, like paving the fucking roads and bridges and building better schools.
https://www.youtube.com/user/FireIceTalon
"Your very ideas are but the outgrowth of conditions of your bourgeois production and bourgeois property, just as your jurisprudence is but the will of your class, made into law for all, a will whose essential character and direction are determined by the economic conditions of the existence of your class." - Marx (addressing the bourgeois)
"Your very ideas are but the outgrowth of conditions of your bourgeois production and bourgeois property, just as your jurisprudence is but the will of your class, made into law for all, a will whose essential character and direction are determined by the economic conditions of the existence of your class." - Marx (addressing the bourgeois)